LA and NC 2014 Congressional Races

[Miles]

LA-01: You have to figure that a good bit of this is insider gossip, but Scalise continues to look good for Majority Whip. Roskam looks like the main opponent with Stutzman also in the running.

LA-05: I had a feeling things would move in this direction:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Miles]

LA-01: More on Scalise. With establishment McCarthy looking good for Majority Leader, Scalise is banking on the caucus' far-right (which is effectively without a viable candidate for Leader):

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[RogueBeaver]

NC-Sen: EMILY's List will inaugurate a $3M anti-Tillis campaign today.

[Miles]

LA-05: Well, if McAllister does end up running again, looks like he's lost the Duck Dynasty vote:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

But, OTOH:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

NC-State Sen: One of the legislative races to watch this year is State Senate seat 9, which is the Wilmington seat. Thom Goolsby, a two-term, conservative stalwart, is retiring; Democrats got a good recruit with Elizabeth Redenbaugh, a local school board member while Republicans have a fresh face with Michael Lee.

The district is comprised of (almost) all of New Hanover County, which is swingy but tilts R. Obama lost it 50-49 in '08 and 52-47 in '12. In the evenly divided '12 LG race, Dan Forest won it 52/48.

Redenbaugh should make a good showing, but the fact that its an off-year should favor Lee. If McIntyre were running again, I'm sure that would have boosted Redenbaugh. Anyway, should set her up for '16 if nothing else.

NC-06: The director of the AFP chapter in NC has endorsed Walker. This sounds more like he's speaking for himself than AFP as whole, but we'll see if this leads to AFP getting further involved in this primary.

[Miles]

NC-Sen: Er....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[RogueBeaver]

Yikes.

[Bleach Blonde Bad Built Butch Bodies for Biden]

Great news!

[Miles]

LA-06: This will help offset her late entry:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The article then goes on to discuss the geographic implications of Whitney's candidacy. In the southern parts (mostly in the bayou) Whitney and Graves will battle it out. Both are strong fundraisers, so Graves will have some real competition. Edwards always did well Acadiana, too.

The north will be pretty fractured. Claitor has a strong base in south Baton Rouge while Dietzel and McCulloch have a presence elsewhere in the parish.

That leaves Ascension and Livingston as the "battlegrounds." I'm actually expecting Dietzel to do well in Livingston Parish; he had a strong effort there when I was last down there. Also, there are a lot of younger (white) professionals there who are libertarian-leaning, exactly the type of voters he could court.

Ascsension is harder to peg. Edwards lives there, but most of the parishes' blacks are in CD2. I'd think Claitor could do well there because of the area's proximity to his Senate district. The Baton Rouge suburbs have increasingly been bleeding into Ascension parish; for most of its history, it was a rural River Parish.

[Miles]

NC-06: Walker is challenging Baby Berger to a debate. Berger has been criticized for not being accessible to voters; surely appearing to debate would help his visibility. OTOH, debate dodging seemed to work out fine for Tillis in the primary.

LA-Sen: The National Journal looks at the role of Keystone XL in this race. While Landrieu is an advocate for it, Reid seems less than sympathetic. Republicans are thus questioning the relevance of her Energy Chairmanship in this debate.

LA-01: ICYMI, Steve Scalise (a fellow LSU alumn ) was elected Majority Whip yesterday. Scalise ran a top-notch whip operation and won on the first ballot. The leadership now has its 'red state voice.' While his two immediate predecessors, Jindal and Vitter, went on to run statewide, Bob Livingston (who held this seat from '77 to '99) was almost Speaker himself.

[Badger]

NC-Sen: Er....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

IMHO, the term "traditional population", especially in context of the rest of his statement, doesn't appear xenophobic or a 'dog whistle' term. Moreover, Tillis wasn't decrying the stagnant growth among said "traditional population" a la Tancredo; he was extolling the need for Republicans to reach out to black and Hispanic voters.

Seems like an innocuous comment to me.

[Never]

NC-Sen: Er....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

IMHO, the term "traditional population", especially in context of the rest of his statement, doesn't appear xenophobic or a 'dog whistle' term. Moreover, Tillis wasn't decrying the stagnant growth among said "traditional population" a la Tancredo; he was extolling the need for Republicans to reach out to black and Hispanic voters.

Seems like an innocuous comment to me.

^^^^^

While it wasn't a particularly tasteful statement on Tillis' part, it is pretty clear that he did not intend to demean any group. I interpreted his comments as arguing that Republicans should find common ground with minorities and do a better job of actually interacting with them.

[Badger]

NC-Sen: Er....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

IMHO, the term "traditional population", especially in context of the rest of his statement, doesn't appear xenophobic or a 'dog whistle' term. Moreover, Tillis wasn't decrying the stagnant growth among said "traditional population" a la Tancredo; he was extolling the need for Republicans to reach out to black and Hispanic voters.

Seems like an innocuous comment to me.

^^^^^

While it wasn't a particularly tasteful statement on Tillis' part, it is pretty clear that he did not intend to demean any group. I interpreted his comments as arguing that Republicans should find common ground with minorities and do a better job of actually interacting with them.

I'm not sure it was even distasteful. If say Julian Castro used the term in context of projected growth of TX Democrat prospects, would anyone really bat an eye?

[Never]

NC-Sen: Er....

You must be logged in to read this quote.

IMHO, the term "traditional population", especially in context of the rest of his statement, doesn't appear xenophobic or a 'dog whistle' term. Moreover, Tillis wasn't decrying the stagnant growth among said "traditional population" a la Tancredo; he was extolling the need for Republicans to reach out to black and Hispanic voters.

Seems like an innocuous comment to me.

^^^^^

While it wasn't a particularly tasteful statement on Tillis' part, it is pretty clear that he did not intend to demean any group. I interpreted his comments as arguing that Republicans should find common ground with minorities and do a better job of actually interacting with them.

I'm not sure it was even distasteful. If say Julian Castro used the term in context of projected growth of TX Democrat prospects, would anyone really bat an eye?

Good point, it's just that I didn't think it was the best choice of words. If Julian Castro said the same thing as Tillis, I wouldn't be particularly impressed, but I would see where he was coming from, in the same way that I understood what Tillis was trying to get across.

[Miles]

But the dichotomy he was trying to get at was "traditional" vs. blacks/hispanics. Traditionally, there has been a large black population in the state.

[Never]

But the dichotomy he was trying to get at was "traditional" vs. blacks/hispanics. Traditionally, there has been a large black population in the state.

Yes, like most Southern states, North Carolina has a sizeable black population, but I'd venture to say that the state has been majority-white since at least some time during the antebellum. If we accepted that Tillis considered "traditional" to mean majority, then his remarks become even less controversial than they already were. I honestly have my doubts that Tillis intended to spark a whites-versus-minorites divide, especially when he argued that the Republican party should work harder to appeal to blacks and Hispanics.

[Miles]

His implication is that "traditional" and non-white are mutually exclusive, which is wrong.

I don't think that this comment is itself game-changing. It does, though, reinforce the "divide and conquer" narrative Hagan is pushing to define Tillis.

[RogueBeaver]

LA-6: Graves profile.

[Miles]

^ See, I called it months ago !

Garret Graves was there, too. He took a few reporter questions after it was over. Seeing him in person, he looks a lot like Paul Ryan, IMO.

[Never]

^ See, I called it months ago !

Garret Graves was there, too. He took a few reporter questions after it was over. Seeing him in person, he looks a lot like Paul Ryan, IMO.

I'm not seeing the resemblance. Mark Sanford, yes... Paul Ryan, no.

[Miles]

^ Well, he does

[Miles]

Ratings: The National Journal puts LA and NC as the 4th and 5th, respectively, most likely seats to flip. AR is behind both, in 6th place; definitely not the way things looked going into this year.

NC-Sen: As they're a growing voting bloc, Hagan's campaign is reaching out to the non-traditional Latino population. Look for Hagan to emphasize Tillis' record as being adverse to the interests of working class Latinos. Hispanics made up 4% of the electorate in the similar VA Gov race last year, helping to swing it to McAuliffe.

NC-10: Scalise has named Rep. Pat McHenry to be the GOP Caucus' Chief Deputy Whip. 'Looks like both these states are moving up in leadership.

NC-State Sen. PoliticsNC continues their very good series on the State Senate. This time they look at Senate seat 10.

This was a seat that fell in 2010, and Republicans were able to cement it into their column with redistricting. It currently consists of Sampson and Duplin counties (both R federally but swingy by state standards) and much of heavily R Johnston county. Before 2011, it included the likewise swingy/D-tilting Lenoir County. When Lenoir was traded for Johnston, the district went solidly R; voting 60/39 Romney in 2012. As with most of eastern NC, this area was traditionally Democratic and tobacco interests still play a big role in local politics.

Democrats have a decent candidate, but Sen. Brent Jackson (R) has a clear advantage.

LA-Sen: The St. Tammany Parish Republican Committee is endorsing Cassidy. St. Tammany, a parish just north of Lake Pontchartrain from New Orleans, is heavily Republican (23% Obama). So, duh, whats the big deal? Well, both Hollis and Maness hail from the parish, so this is a notable blow to their efforts.

LA-06: As she raised $100K just by saying global warming is a hoax, the newest candidate, Rep. Lenar Whitney, is doubling down. She's released a 5-minute video where she rants against global warming and the 'lamestream' media. This woman doesn't impress me; Republicans, you have better options here.

More LA-06: Here's Paul Dietzel's speech at the RLC last month where he introduced Herman Cain.

[Miles]

LA-06: Though he's been in the race for a while, Sen. Dan Claitor (R) is out with a brief announcement video. He brings up his experience as a businessman and strikes a populist message. Hopefully, this means he'll start to kick his campaign into gear.

[RogueBeaver]

Has LA-6 been fairly quiet generally lately?

[Indy Texas]

But the dichotomy he was trying to get at was "traditional" vs. blacks/hispanics. Traditionally, there has been a large black population in the state.

Yes, like most Southern states, North Carolina has a sizeable black population, but I'd venture to say that the state has been majority-white since at least some time during the antebellum. If we accepted that Tillis considered "traditional" to mean majority, then his remarks become even less controversial than they already were. I honestly have my doubts that Tillis intended to spark a whites-versus-minorites divide, especially when he argued that the Republican party should work harder to appeal to blacks and Hispanics.

I'm going to try to give the blue avatars some advice: please don't use the word "traditional." Just don't use it. Because for whatever reason, you guys have this pathological need to use it to juxtapose against things and groups and concepts that you don't like.

"I support 'traditional marriage'" = I hate gays and don't want to let them get married

"I will protect our traditional values" = I don't view non-Eurocentric Protestant-influenced cultures as legitimate

This comment simply implies what he and so many Republicans believe: that somehow white people and the particular brand of white culture that Republicans so fervently booster is somehow more legitimate than other groups.

Does it matter to you at all that there are Hispanic people in Texas whose families have lived there for hundreds of years longer than many of the "traditional" white people?

Do we need to address Native Americans? Or the fact that black people have been living here (not by choice) since colonial times?

Tillis could easily have said "Population growth rates among non-Hispanic whites are projected to be stagnant in the coming decades." That would have been the right thing to say. He didn't. He had to dog whistle and embark on the sort of pathetic self-congratulation that he and other Republicans feel like they deserve for being white and bestow the "traditional" title upon "our kind of people."

[Never]

But the dichotomy he was trying to get at was "traditional" vs. blacks/hispanics. Traditionally, there has been a large black population in the state.

Yes, like most Southern states, North Carolina has a sizeable black population, but I'd venture to say that the state has been majority-white since at least some time during the antebellum. If we accepted that Tillis considered "traditional" to mean majority, then his remarks become even less controversial than they already were. I honestly have my doubts that Tillis intended to spark a whites-versus-minorites divide, especially when he argued that the Republican party should work harder to appeal to blacks and Hispanics.

I'm going to try to give the blue avatars some advice: please don't use the word "traditional." Just don't use it. Because for whatever reason, you guys have this pathological need to use it to juxtapose against things and groups and concepts that you don't like.

"I support 'traditional marriage'" = I hate gays and don't want to let them get married

"I will protect our traditional values" = I don't view non-Eurocentric Protestant-influenced cultures as legitimate

This comment simply implies what he and so many Republicans believe: that somehow white people and the particular brand of white culture that Republicans so fervently booster is somehow more legitimate than other groups.

Does it matter to you at all that there are Hispanic people in Texas whose families have lived there for hundreds of years longer than many of the "traditional" white people?

Do we need to address Native Americans? Or the fact that black people have been living here (not by choice) since colonial times?

Tillis could easily have said "Population growth rates among non-Hispanic whites are projected to be stagnant in the coming decades." That would have been the right thing to say. He didn't. He had to dog whistle and embark on the sort of pathetic self-congratulation that he and other Republicans feel like they deserve for being white and bestow the "traditional" title upon "our kind of people."

Point taken, but as a minority, and a Southerner to boot, I'd like to think that I can recognize dog-whistle tactics. I just didn't see Tillis as using them in this specific case. He wasn't attacking racial minorities; he even commented that he felt there are things that both the Republican Party and minorities stand for. In my view, Tillis did not intend to make whites a more legitimate group, especially when we witness him commenting that they have a stable population and that Republicans should work harder to reasonate with other groups that are actually growing.